Talk:C17 (C standard revision)

C++ Suggestion
Can we please stop mentioning C++ standards along with C? They're two completely different languages. It'd be like mentioning Java versions here IMO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:7F3:8583:309A:3697:F6FF:FE7D:870A (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Further discussion
There's some discussion for this at Talk:C11_(C_standard_revision). Widefox ; talk 09:34, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

C17 vs C18
Can I suggest to rename this article to C17 (with C18 being a redirection)? The reason being is that the committee itself (see various documents in the link below) is using the term "C17". The mainstream compilers (GCC and LLVM/clang) support, but also have   aliases. It just seems that "C17" is more dominant.

Reference: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindaur (talk • contribs) 22:42, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree with the proposal. GCC uses  or  Yoonghm (talk) 00:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Disagree - See the discussion at the link above. There's redirect for the C17 name, and it is ISO/IEC 9899:2018, "C18

The current standard is ISO/IEC 9899:2018 (aka C17 and C18)", "The Current C Programming Language Standard – ISO/IEC 9899:2018 (C18)" so I named it after the official name and what appears as potentially the common name. Articles for deletion/C18 (C standard revision) isn't the right venue (as closed) but as C17 is a redirect, RfD or move request is, not that I think it's worth it as we don't care what flags compilers use.  Widefox ; talk 23:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, this is Herb Sutter, convenor of the ISO C++ committee but also a participant in C... I just checked with David Keaton, who is the convenor of the ISO C committee, to ask him this question, and his response was: "It's C17. I have no idea where Wikipedia got the idea that it had changed." -- Note that just because ISO is slow and doesn't publish until the next calendar year doesn't change the year the technical work on the standard is done, which is what C and C++ go by. For example, C++20 finished its technical work in Feb 2020, and passed it final ISO approval ballot on 4 Sep 2020, and is now in the final editorial stages... but even if Geneva is slow and doesn't get around to publishing it until 2021, it's still C++20. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.195.19.78 (talk) 22:16, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

My name is Bryce Adelstein Lelbach. I am the chair of INCITS PL22, the US standards committee for programming languages. It's called C17, not C18, regardless of the year of final publication. Calling it C18 on wikipedia will cause unnecessary confusion. Please don't. Blelbach (talk) 23:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 26 October 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 19:17, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

C18 (C standard revision) → C17 (C standard revision) – The technical work on this revision was completed in 2017, is, and WG14 (the C standards committee) calls it C17 (see ). While compilers support aliases, their documentations still use "C17" (e.g.,, , ). It seems unlikely that "C18" would be the clear WP:COMMONNAME as postulated above, although it's difficult to prove one way or the other given the less-than-ideal search term and the minor bug-fix nature of the release. T. Canens (talk) 17:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment: My name is Bryce Adelstein Lelbach. I am the chair of INCITS PL22, the US standards committee for programming languages. It's called C17, not C18, regardless of the year of final publication. Calling it C18 on wikipedia will cause unnecessary confusion. Blelbach (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support: C17 does seem like the common name, also the more natural title. - Astrophobe  (talk) 21:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support: From this and the previous section, it seems clear that the consensus in the committee(s) is to call it C17, rather than C18. – numbermaniac  05:38, 29 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.